Hello everyone, recently a break in happened at the place I work at and now we have running and recording cameras at the security relevant places. I wanted to ask wheter this form here is correctly and what juristical security I have when signing this. I will have to sign it eventually to keep working there anyways so just to be sure.
Reason I am even questioning this is because the company I work for is sluggish in their work on most spectrums and treats their employees like expandables. The work contract is pretty grey zoned as well so I am careful. In the process of installing the cams we also lost our one and only social room, where we would make phone calls or change clothes. Incidentally the safe is also there, so no more break room for us!
What really bothers me is the fact, that a former manager told me (and the current manager) that the boss wanted to introduce cameras before the break in happened as a measure to surveil and observe the behavior and work culture of the staff, which would be a clear violation of Art. 26 of the ArGV 3. A quick run with ChatGPT also confirmes my observations that this document has missing parts. For now I told them that in point "Legal basis" I would like them to also list the ArGV 3 and StGB, although they mentioned it in text. Turns out this isn’t even the part that would be wrong.
What will I do? As things are right now, I am waiting their response and adjusted document and I will sign it, with an addition stating that although I do aknowledge this new addition under the DSG, I do not consent to the processing of this data (what chat told me).
https://i.redd.it/fze2y2v2rabg1.png
Posted by TGWTDH
6 Comments
They are allowed to add security cameras for safety reasons ie prevention of theft, and the places where the cameras are being placed make sense for that.
They are also informing you in advance. The document isnt missing anything. They merely have to inform you and thats it. Its not a contract or something. By signing you just acknowledge that they told you. Its to have proof that they did as its a requirement. The paper doesnt do anything more than that.
So what they are doing is legal and you cant do anything about it
It’s a bit shoddy as a legal document, but it does cover most of the necessary basics. It would be better if an actual lawyer would’ve written it.
I think you’re correct in demanding clarity and it sucks you’re losing some of the privacy in the common rooms. Securing the safe is a valid and understandable reason though to also set up cameras. It’s good they don’t also record the sound. TBH it does look reasonable, if the document were a bit more professional. Given the context you describe, I also wouldn’t have a great feeling about it, but I don’t think you can do much about it beyond what you mentioned already.
When they use video against you and not in accordance with the data law or what is written here (e.g. if they do record audio and you didnt know) you can go against them. Wherever I worked, there was video. For me personally, it was usually great. Once my boss touched me repeatedly and tried to kiss me. I told it a co-worker and the co-worker told the COO. He was outraged and checked the cameras and tada… it was all there. It was also used when accidents happened (police and insurance) or when people were terminated without notice (usually stealing money).
Here is the very informative article from the federal government:
>Überwachung von Angestellten: Videoüberwachung am Arbeitsplatz
https://www.edoeb.admin.ch/de/videoueberwachung-am-arbeitsplatz
You can also send them an email with your questions. I have already written to the government about another issue and received a reply within three days.
However, I would venture to say that your employer is allowed to do this and that you should change employers if you can.
The four areas that are now under surveillance seem fine to me. Depending on the size of your company (number of employees) and the departments I find it a bit „suspicious“, that the Geschäftsleitung has the sole permission to access the recordings. In my opinion this should be a data privacy offer (CISO, ISO), the Facility Manager or a Security Officer. If there is cause to review any recording, the board should review the request and grant it if they see it necessary.
The document surely doesn‘t read as if it was drafted by an expert in this field.
Personally, I don‘t care too much when I get taped while entering the building or one of the surveilled rooms.
Sounds fine to me. That the company can monitor employees is always allowed, never assume what you do at work is private, they can see everything. If you don’t trust your company to be competent or ethical in handling the footage I think it’s better if you find another workplace because if there is no trust the relationship is damaged regardless.